1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 31 October 2016 b. Date Received: 2 December 2016 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he enjoyed a long and decorated career as a Soldier, the majority of which was spent as a UH-60 pilot. He was a victim of a material injustice by receiving an under other than honorable conditions discharge in lieu of trial by court martial. His chain of command made a material error of fact by only judging his entire military service on a single incident of misconduct. The applicant's chain of command disregarded his substance abuse struggles at the time of his misconduct and elected to separate him. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, case files, AHLTA and JLV reviewed. AHLTA notes indicate applicant had very little contact with BH from 2005 until 2014 when he was arrested for drinking and possession of a controlled substance (Tramadol). He was seen by Behavioral Health and diagnosed with Alcohol Dependence. He denied any history of PTSD symptoms. He presented with symptoms of depression, insomnia and anhedonia and was diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder and placed on medication. In Oct 2014, he was evaluated by ASAP and reported a long history of drug abuse dating back to his teenage years. He reported he had been drinking since his teens and had tried many times to quit. He met all 7 of the 7 criteria for Alcohol Dependence. He also reported that he had a history of abusing cocaine, methamphetamine, Valium, amphetamines, opioids, LSD/mushrooms and Robitussin. ASAP diagnosed him with Alcohol Dependence and Amphetamine Dependence. He was subsequently enrolled in the Landstuhl Addiction Medicine Intensive Outpatient Program which he attended from 20 Oct 2014 to 24 Nov 2014. He was seen by Neuropsychology for evaluation of cognitive issues in Dec 2014. Neuropsychology felt that his cognitive issues were due to his substance abuse. They diagnosed him with Anxiety Disorder NOS, Alcohol Dependence and Polysubstance Dependence. Neuropsych testing indicated he had a personality style characterized by stimulation seeking and risk taking behaviors. In Dec 2014, he passed out and was diagnosed with Concussion with brief LOC. He had a similar episode of syncope occur in 2008 and had a completely negative workup (nl head CT, nl head MRI, nl EEG, nl cardiac workup). It was felt that his syncopal episodes were due to being overtired and dehydrated. In May 2015, he presented to BH with psychotic symptoms: grandiose delusions, paranoid ideation and labile mood. He was admitted to inpatient psychiatry and was discharged in stable condition approx. one week later. His diagnosis was Psychosis. JLV indicates that he is 40% SC for tinnitus (10%), back issues (10%) and sciatic nerve issues (20%). He underwent a PTSD C&P evaluation and was found to not meet full PTSD criteria. He was instead diagnosed with Unspecified Trauma and Stressor Related Disorder with his childhood history identified as the primary stressor. Based on the available documentation, the applicant does not have a mitigating behavioral health diagnosis. Unspecified Trauma and Stressor Related Disorder is not mitigating for the crime of drug possession/intent to distribute. Because his brief period of AWOL and wrongful use of Tramadol and amphetamines occurred during the same time as his commission of other criminal activity, they are considered part of this other criminal activity. As such, his diagnosis of a Trauma and Stressor Related Disorder is not considered mitigating for either of these offenses. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 9 March 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial / AR 600-8-24, Paragraph 3-13 / DFS / NA / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 27 April 2015 c. Separation Facts: No (1) Date Charges Were Preferred: 2 October 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which indicates on 2 October 2014, the applicant was charged with attempting to wrongfully introduce approximately 294 tablets of Tramadol, each with a dosage of 50 milligrams, a schedule IV controlled substance onto an installation used by the armed forces of the United States, Camp Bondsteel, Kosovo (30 August 2014); conspired with CW4 X, U.S. Army, to commit an offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, introduction of Tramadol, a schedule IV controlled substance onto an installation used by the armed forces of the United States, Camp Bondsteel, Kosovo, and in order to effect the object of the conspiracy the said WO1 L.T.B., U.S. Army and CW 4 X, U.S. Army put Tramadol in CW4 X cargo pockets upon entering Camp Bondsteel, Kosovo (30 August 2014); without authority, absent himself from his unit (30 August 2014 until 31 August 2014); having knowledge of a lawful order issued by COL X., an order which it was his duty to obey, did at or near Camp Bondsteel, Kosovo, fail to obey the same by purchasing medicine and controlled substances from Kosovo pharmacies (30 August 2014); did at or near Camp Bondsteel, Kosovo wrongfully possess 294 tablets of Tramadol, each with a dosage of 50 milligrams, a schedule IV controlled substance (30 August 2014); did at or near Camp Bondsteel, Kosovo, wrongfully use Tramadol, a schedule IV controlled substance (about 30 August 2014); and did at or near Camp Bondsteel, Kosovo, wrongfully use amphetamine, a schedule III controlled substance between (27 May 2014 and 18 September 2014). (3) Recommended Characterization: The US Army NATO Commanding General, recommended an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. (4) Legal Consultation Date: 2 October 2014 On 3 October 2014, the applicant voluntarily tendered his resignation from the Army for the good of the service under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, chapter 3, paragraph 3-13. He did not desire to appear before a court-martial or board of officers (BOI). (5) Administrative Separation Board/BOI: None (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On 20 April 2015, The Department of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board reviewed his Resignation for the Good of the Service in Lieu of General Court-Martial tendered by the applicant. The Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) accepted his resignation and he was discharged from the US Army with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 21 November 2014 / OAD / 179 days / block 12a on the applicant's DD Form 214 dated entered active duty is incorrect, should read as annotated on the Case Report and Directive. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 25 years / BS Degree / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: WO2 / 153DO UH-60 Pilot / 13 years, 8 months, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 26 April 2001 to 19 August 2001 / NA IADT, 20 August 2001 to 8 February 2002 / HD USAR, 9 February 2002 to 6 August 2003 / NA ARNG / ROTC / SMP, 7 August 2003 to 22 August 2004 / HD USARCG, 23 August 2004 to 2 December 2004 / NA Appointed 2LT / ARNG 3 December 2004 to 6 December 2004 / NA ARNG, 7 December 2004 to 5 April 2007 / NA AD, 6 April 2007 to 9 September 2008 / HD ARNG, 10 September 2008 to 8 July 2009 / NA Appointed WO1 / ARNG 9 July 2009 to 2 October 2010 / NA AD, 3 October 2010 to 21 December 2010 / HD ARNG, 22 December 2010 to 20 November 2014 / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq x2, 5 August 2007 to 27 July 2008 / 13 December 2009 to 21 September 2010 / Kosovo, 6 January 2014 to 23 December 2014 f. Awards and Decorations: MSM, AM-2, ARCAM-2, NDSM, AFEM, ICM-2CS, GWOTSM, AFRM-M DEV, ASR, OSR-2, NATO MDL, MUC, PUC g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CID Report of Investigation, dated 2 September 2014, relates the applicant was under investigation for conspiracy, wrongful possessions of drugs and wrongful introduction of drugs. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 16 October 2014, shows that the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of alcohol dependence and alcohol induced mood disorder. He was screened for PTSD and mTBI, both screens were negative. Report of Medical Examination, dated 11 December 2014, relates that the applicant was diagnosed with major depression (on medication) and alcohol dependence. There were no other behavioral health concerns that would preclude separation form service. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); attorney's brief (seven pages); Exhibits 1-2, six previous DD Forms 214; Exhibit 3, Reserve Officer Appointment and personnel qualification record (four pages); Exhibit 4, NGB Form 22; ); Exhibit 5, charge sheet (four pages); Exhibit 6, CID Report (34 pages); Exhibit 7, DASA's Memorandum; Exhibit 8, current DD Form 214; Exhibit 9, numerous awards, certificates, orders, diplomas and citations; Exhibit 10, letter of support; Exhibit 11, ASAP outpatient discharge summary (two pages); Exhibit 12, criminal background check (two pages); Exhibit 13, rapid sharing lesson newsletter (eight pages); Exhibit 14, Valley's Best Hospice, Inc. ID card; Exhibit 15, Masonic membership card; Exhibits 16-17, VA documents (four pages); and Exhibit 18, Officer Record Brief. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states he is employed as a pilot for the U.S. Forrest Service and volunteers at the Valley Hospice in Lancaster, California and is an Active Free & Accepted Mason of the Schofield Lodge, through which he volunteers to his local community. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 635-100 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of commissioned and warrant officers from the active Army. Chapter 3, Section XV establishes policy and procedures for involuntary relief from active duty. Paragraph 3-58(g) provides that an officer who is found guilty, or action is taken tantamount to a finding of guilty, in a Federal or State court may be immediately released from active duty by the Secretary of the Army, when the offense is punishable under the UCMJ with confinement of one year or more, or when the offense involves moral turpitude, regardless of the sentence received or the maximum punishment under any code. Army Regulation 600-8-24 prescribes the policies and procedures governing the transfer and discharge of Army officers. Chapter 3, paragraph 3-13 outlines the rules for processing requests for resignation for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by a general court-martial. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is an administrative separation from the service under conditions other than honorable. An officer will normally receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge when they resign for the good of the service, are dropped from the rolls of the Army, are involuntarily separated due to misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or for the final revocation of a security clearance as a result of an act or acts of misconduct. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "DFS" as the appropriate code to assign officer Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, Chapter 3-13, in lieu of trial by court-martial. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The record indicates the applicant was charged with the commission of offenses punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a punitive discharge. The applicant voluntarily requested resignation in lieu of trial by general court-martial under the provisions of Chapter 3, AR 600-8-24. The appropriate authority approved the applicant's request with issuance of an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. The applicant did not desire to appear before a court-martial or a board of officers. The applicant requests a change to the narrative reason for discharge. Army Regulation 635-5- 1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "DFS" as the appropriate code to assign officer Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, Chapter 3-13, in lieu of trial by court-martial. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. The applicant seeks relief contending, he enjoyed a long and decorated career as a Soldier, the majority of which was spent as a UH-60 pilot. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant further contends, he was a victim of a material injustice by receiving an under other than honorable conditions discharge in lieu of trial by court martial. The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. The applicant also contends, his chain of command made a material error of fact by only judging his entire military service on a single incident of misconduct. The service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of officer Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant additionally contends, his chain of command disregarded his substance abuse struggles at the time of his misconduct and elected to separate him. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was enrolled into outpatient treatment on 16 October 2014. This was his first referral to ASAP. He entered ASAP in Germany after an alcohol related incident while deployed to Kosovo. He attended weekly groups and individual sessions. He did not continue substance use in treatment. He attended group sessions and individual sessions. He was interactive with group members while in treatment. The applicant's post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and in the documents with the application. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 9 March 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a new DD-214/Issue new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20160019627 1